Who Speaks for the Obsolete Man?

 By David Bozeman

Quick recap: as to who the obsolete man is, refer to my opening post Who is the Obsolete Man? In a nutshell, I'm referring to older guys like me, personable men in an impersonal world, struggling to survive on common sense and hard work.

So, who in mainstream culture speaks for us? Hmmm...help me decide.

Without going on a political tirade, candidate Donald Trump connected effortlessly with working-class Americans who felt the major parties had either forgotten them or abandoned them for younger and more urban demographic groups. Many of these voters still hold great affinity for President Trump.

Politicians, however, can't really speak to us as human beings. To them, voters are simply assets or liabilities, movable pieces in a giant cut-throat war of strategy. Politicians enjoy only a tenuous relationship with voters. They couldn't lift our souls even if they had the time - or the desire. Likewise, the news media, including the commentariat, serves its own biases. If the facts of your life don't conform to their worldview, you may as well not exist.

Which brings us to talk radio, that giant echo (or rather ego) chamber, full of endless prattle about scandal, rumors of scandal and constant political forecasting, as each host competes to be the loudest, baddest a** in the room.

To their credit, The Daily Wire guys tend to sidestep politics. Ben Shapiro, Matt Walsh and the toothy Michael Knowles largely discuss social issues, pop culture, lifestyles, etc., but offer a tone bordering on smug, guardians of a hyper-intellectualized yet traditional worldview long on truth but short on simple human warmth. The flannel-clad Matt Walsh once dismissed some of his critics as, "childless losers." I guess one presupposes the other? All three tout the traditional home in the suburbs, barely leaving a niche in their cookie-cutter world for us obsolete guys. Still, I would rate these three as at least worth a listen - some of the time.

Author and speaker Jordan Peterson (12 Rules for Life and numerous others) speaks to men, particularly young men, affirming their worth and longing for purpose in a feminized, morally chaotic culture. His work requires mental labor, but the rewards more than pay off. Peterson flies in the face of fashion and philosophy-by-soundbite and speaks to our innate humanity and worth.

Sadly, much of what passes for thought amounts to little more than entertainment. We glean headlines and chunks of ideas without context. How often do we scroll the Internet out of boredom, unaware of our own longings for a cause, a passion, someone to inspire us, to prod us to a destiny.

The point here is not that there are no voices for the lonely and the (self-perceived) discards of society, just that there are so few. Perhaps rather than looking for a voice, the obsolete man should BE a voice. Not easy, given that our polite upbringings have conditioned us to hold our tongues and be good listeners. With age, however, we become cynical and, in my case, impatient.

The ebb and flow of public discourse tends to take on a monotonous, I've-heard-it-all-before quality. After years of struggle, we don't need advice from the school-boy newcomers to life's struggles. Maybe it's time they listen to us. The real question is not who speaks for the obsolete man but is the obsolete man ready to speak for himself, thus declaring - boldly - that no man is obsolete.

Of Boys and Men by Richard Reeves - Who Should Read This Book?

 Of Boys and Men by Richard Reeves - Who Should Read This Book?

Instead of a book reviewer's review, here is a regular guy's list of reasons why you will appreciate Of Boys and Men by Richard Reeves (2022).

1). The author and Brookings Institute scholar offers compelling facts and opinions not discussed anywhere else (such thought just isn't fashionable). He reveals, for instance, the education gap. Boys lag well behind girls in most metrics in primary education. Men remain vastly under-represented in college and graduate schools. The modern economy, furthermore, through automation and free trade, has rendered numerous male-dominated jobs obsolete. Racial disparities, Reeves demonstrates, can often be traced to the obstacles faced by boys and men in non-white communities. He also unveils the personal side of male life, revealing a subculture of young men aimless, friendless, drifting from one low-wage job to another, finding solace only in video games and porn. Except for occasional lip service, society does little to encourage fatherhood, thus single-parent (usually female-led) households leave boys without role models, and men rendered obsolete or, at best, money machines.

2). This book is not anti-woman or anti-feminist. The fact that this disclaimer is even necessary shows the limits and hyper-sensitivity of our national discourse. Reeves stands left of center and celebrates the progress of women in the last century. None of his solutions call for a strict return to traditional gender roles (i.e., women confined to housework). This book confronts the either-or, my-side-versus-yours mentality dominating prevalent thought. Yes, one can lament the challenges facing women while at the same time examining the effects of social change that have left men under-performing and under-prepared.

3).  This book challenges you to think but doesn't assault you with rage and political rants. Reeves writes clearly and with a great measure of compassion, more focused on addressing problems than assigning blame, more willing to advance solutions than to cheer for his own side. Conservatives may cringe at his calls to spend more money promoting men in health, education and social work where they are greatly under-represented (meanwhile, massive amounts of public and private funding promote more women in science, technology and mathematics). Still, one does not have to give up his conservative card to just consider affirmative action programs to increase the number of male teachers, especially in primary education, where boys tend to benefit the most. Some on the left will recoil at the idea that feminism might lend a modicum of its public currency to vulnerable boys and men, but, in challenging prevailing orthodoxies, Reeves offers a perspective that is fresh, illuminating and a welcome break from the predictable give and take of modern debate.

The point here is not to brand a new victim group. However, we can face the reality of marginalized and aimless young males now. . . or deal with the consequences later. All Reeves is asking is to think outside the comfort box of your own preconceived notions. He seeks not political clout but to share deep concern. This father of three sons has written a short (less than 200 pages), brisk, fact-based thesis concerning problems discussed only on the periphery of mainstream thought. You can bring the discussion to the forefront. For the males in your life, get this book.

_-David Bozeman

Note: Please feel free to comment. Also, you can reach me at davidbozeman63@gmail.com